I am not talking about rights on pictures here. I am indicating who made the mistake of putting it up in the first place.
Besides, nowhere was indicated this picture was protected by any form of copyright hence it was free for all to use.

Otherwise NOBODY would be able anymore to use ANY picture which is posted on the web because there would ALWAYS be some sort of owner.

On that NDA thing, I knew who was being referred to. Also that person is tied by the hands and I am quite convinced the info which is being brought out is reviewed upfront (or at least is part of a list indicating : "CAN and CAN NOT TELL"). Unless I am mistaking ...

Of course, Palm could have made this a non-issue by simply spending an extra $20 to spec better parts and also by being more honest in letting everyone know how the Foleo fits into their long-term computing vision.

I'm just concerned about what you mean by "spec better parts".

What's wrong with the specs with the job the Foleo is supposed to do? I mean if all the apps that meet the Foleo's requirements e.g. instant switching, no lag or load times, low memory requirements, etc., why does it need a faster processor?

It seems like you're trying to define what the specs should be based on a function you decide the Foleo is meant not to do. But if everything is already instant and fast enough, what is there to gain by making it faster outside of lower battery life and more heat? Why do you get to decide what constitutes "better specs"?

There's too much focus on faster everything these days, contrary to Palm who seem to be evidencing that you can actually make desktop applications with low computing power. Imagine that: I don't need the latest Centrino Core Duo gobbly-gook and 2gigs of RAM to do the basics? What does that say about Microsoft or Apple?

And what the heck does "an acquaintance at Palm" even mean? So all of the huff-n-puff about Palm being embarrassed is not the case, since no one from Palm has requested this pic be pulled?

As far as the pic: no opinion. I hardly see the big deal is for either side.

So which did the OP of the photo originally declare it? (I assume after the fact, he added the Copyright, correct?)

* No license - All rights reserved. This basically means that you should assume that you need to ask permission from the creator/owner to use the work for the vast majority of uses.

OR

* The six standard Creative Commons licenses. These licenses grant you the right to do certain things, such as create ‘derivative works’, with certain obligations on your part, such as properly attributing the original work.

Because the PIC article clearly (as much as possible, since the poster was anon) attributes the photo the holder of the Flickr account, thereby falling under The six standard Creative Commons licenses, correct?

I think he is well within his rights to post the information he posted. The photo was posted on a public site with no copyright nor a request not to post.

My wife is a News Anchor for a major CBS affilate. Last night I ran all of this by her and asked her what she thought about Palminfocentral using the photo. She said that she felt Palminfocentral is totally in the clear with what they did and should only pull the photo if they felt like pulling it. She went on to say that they (the CBS people) have attornies to deal with people like Mr. Chupa and his associate.

Greg

The photo actually is copyrighted. (See previous posts regarding photos on Flickr.) Furthermore, the photo's owner asked that the photo be pulled and it was not. I'm not sure how much clearer this could be. Nevertheless I'm done with this issue. If Ryan from Palminfocenter feels he has the right to post whatever personal, copyrighted photos he wants to on his site, there isn't much anyone can do about it.

What's wrong with the specs with the job the Foleo is supposed to do? I mean if all the apps that meet the Foleo's requirements e.g. instant switching, no lag or load times, low memory requirements, etc., why does it need a faster processor?

It seems like you're trying to define what the specs should be based on a function you decide the Foleo is meant not to do. But if everything is already instant and fast enough, what is there to gain by making it faster outside of lower battery life and more heat? Why do you get to decide what constitutes "better specs"?

There's too much focus on faster everything these days, contrary to Palm who seem to be evidencing that you can actually make desktop applications with low computing power. Imagine that: I don't need the latest Centrino Core Duo gobbly-gook and 2gigs of RAM to do the basics? What does that say about Microsoft or Apple?

And what the heck does "an acquaintance at Palm" even mean? So all of the huff-n-puff about Palm being embarrassed is not the case, since no one from Palm has requested this pic be pulled?

As far as the pic: no opinion. I hardly see the big deal is for either side.

Like many others here I would like to see the Foleo work as a device that can potentially REPLACE MY LAPTOP. While you could legitimately argue that that was never Palm's intention, I disagree. Of course, if all Palm had hoped to build really was just a simplistic Treo "companion", then you are completely correct in saying the Foleo is speced correctly.

For $600 I'd like to see a 624 - 800 MHz CPU, an independent graphics chip, 1 GB built-in RAM. And a LOT more full-featured software. I don't believe any of these features (especially the software! ) would significantly affect battery life.

This photo drama has quickly become a tempest in a teapot. A great opportunity for others to try to try to start a flame war, but I'm doing my best to remain civil.

The photo actually is copyrighted. (See previous posts regarding photos on Flickr.) Furthermore, the photo's owner asked that the photo be pulled and it was not. I'm not sure how much clearer this could be. Nevertheless I'm done with this issue. If Ryan from Palminfocenter feels he has the right to post whatever personal, copyrighted photos he wants to on his site, there isn't much anyone can do about it.

You didn't do your research very well. By definition, from US Copyright Law:

"Bare facts are in the Public Domain. Works must show sufficient human creativity to be eligible to copyright. " (United States of America, US Copyright Law, www.copyright.gov, 2007)

The pictures publically published (with no copyright designation) by your associate on a public blog site, reporting "Bare Facts", is Public Domain and therefore not eligiable for copyright under US Law.

You associate gave up his copyrights when he publically posted those pictures with no copyright designation. They are now public domain and can be freely usable by anyone.

You didn't do your research very well. By definition, from US Copyright Law:

"Bare facts are in the Public Domain. Works must show sufficient human creativity to be eligible to copyright. " (United States of America, US Copyright Law, www.copyright.gov, 2007)

The pictures publically published (with no copyright designation) by your associate on a public blog site, reporting "Bare Facts", is Public Domain and therefore not eligiable for copyright under US Law.

You associate gave up his copyrights when he publically posted those pictures with no copyright designation. They are now public domain and can be freely usable by anyone.

Actually, the photo was an artistic photoessay entitled, "Vision in Blue".

Secondly, the photos are copyrighted - all the Flickr photos are unless designated otherwise.

I think Flickr is a factor, because to put up the photo, an url needs to be referenced, and the url is to the Flickr post, where it was originally put up.

(I haven't posted a picture here specifically, but that's how it's worked for me in other forums I've been to at least.)

As for everything else. I will give the benefit of the doubt to Ryan at PalmInfoCenter. Calls to pull the image from a forum post can be made by anyone, so it can be tricky to just pull images from those requests. More substantial proof should be required to prove ownership of the image.

1) Future Palm applications will have the ability to scale up from a Treo-sized screen to the full-screen size of a Foleo, while keeping the user interface intact. The Treo and Foleo copies of applications will communicate much like the Foleo's email app and VersaMail/Outlook do now, keeping everything in sync. The implications of this feature bode well for the future of the Foleo as a viable platform.

Imagine a version of a personal finance application like Microsoft Money that works equally well on a Treo and a Foleo and can sync in an instant.

Imagine an ebook reader that remembers where you were in a book when reading on a Foleo and allows you to carry on at the same page when using the Treo.

Imagine an instant messaging application that allows you to continue conversations seamlessly whether as you move back and forth between Treo and Foleo.

Imagine a full-featured document editor that allows you to work on and synchronize Word-compatible documents with either the Treo or Foleo.

Imagine a full-featured spreadsheet application that allows you to work on and synchronize Excel-compatible documents with either the Treo or Foleo.

Imagine an MP3/video player that is completely in sync between the Treo and Foleo.

1) Future Palm applications will have the ability to scale up from a Treo-sized screen to the full-screen size of a Foleo, while keeping the user interface intact. The Treo and Foleo copies of applications will communicate much like the Foleo's email app and VersaMail/Outlook do now, keeping everything in sync. The implications of this feature bode well for the future of the Foleo as a viable platform.

Imagine a version of a personal finance application like Microsoft Money that works equally well on a Treo and a Foleo and can sync in an instant.

Imagine an ebook reader that remembers where you were in a book when reading on a Foleo and allows you to carry on at the same page when using the Treo.

Imagine an instant messaging application that allows you to continue conversations seamlessly whether as you move back and forth between Treo and Foleo.

Imagine a full-featured document editor that allows you to work on and synchronize Word-compatible documents with either the Treo or Foleo.

Imagine a full-featured spreadsheet application that allows you to work on and synchronize Excel-compatible documents with either the Treo or Foleo.

Imagine an MP3/video player that is completely in sync between the Treo and Foleo.

1) Future Palm applications will have the ability to scale up from a Treo-sized screen to the full-screen size of a Foleo, while keeping the user interface intact. The Treo and Foleo copies of applications will communicate much like the Foleo's email app and VersaMail/Outlook do now, keeping everything in sync. The implications of this feature bode well for the future of the Foleo as a viable platform.

Imagine a version of a personal finance application like Microsoft Money that works equally well on a Treo and a Foleo and can sync in an instant.

Imagine an ebook reader that remembers where you were in a book when reading on a Foleo and allows you to carry on at the same page when using the Treo.

Imagine an instant messaging application that allows you to continue conversations seamlessly whether as you move back and forth between Treo and Foleo.

Imagine a full-featured document editor that allows you to work on and synchronize Word-compatible documents with either the Treo or Foleo.

Imagine a full-featured spreadsheet application that allows you to work on and synchronize Excel-compatible documents with either the Treo or Foleo.

Imagine an MP3/video player that is completely in sync between the Treo and Foleo.

Excellent points here, all great ideas, i wholeheartedly support these efforts to create these applications. The desktop(foleo) side of each application should obviously present an interface to easily enter all of the information that is specific to the functionality of the Treo side application, taking advantage of the larger screen and full size keyboard for rapid entry.

Excellent points here, all great ideas, i wholeheartedly support these efforts to create these applications. The desktop(foleo) side of each application should obviously present an interface to easily enter all of the information that is specific to the functionality of the Treo side application, taking advantage of the larger screen and full size keyboard for rapid entry.

I believe part of the problem is that Palm needed to get Palm Linux for Treos up and running before software syncing to Foleo apps could be pushed. Development of PalmOS 5 apps that sync with the Foleo is in some ways a waste of time.

Until Palm Linux for Treos arrives, I suspect that we won't be seeing all that the Foleo can do. Or why it's "worth" $600.

Unfortunately, once I started probing a little deeper into the Foleo things got somewhat uglier under the surface.

Problem #1 appears to be its very limited specs:

CPU speed = 415.33

128 MB available RAM

Wow.
Not. Good. Palm.

Unfortunately, as those of us who attended Linux World were advised, the specs listed in the photo of the Foleo REALLY are the specs it will ship with. As will it ship with the 4 year old Linux distribution shown in the photo.

Palm is now partnering with Wind River to create/suport the Foleo's Linux, so it would appear that the shipping version of the Foleo's Palm Linux will be replaced with a Wind River version of Linux sometime in the next year. Very bizarre strategy on Palm's part, but it suggests they are willing to get much-needed help in developing Linux code.

Unfortunately, as those of us who attended Linux World were advised, the specs listed in the photo of the Foleo REALLY are the specs it will ship with. As will it ship with the 4 year old Linux distribution shown in the photo.

The version of the linux kernel has nothing to do with the distribution. They are two entirely seperate beasts. The 2.4.X kernel isn't mainstream any longer, but I'm guessing there is a very good reason why Palm went with it. Red Enterprise Linux, for example, does not deploy the latest Linux Kernel, but instead Redhat patches a very stable kernel with the bug fixes/enhancements in mainstream code. RHEL ran with a patched 2.4.x kernel long after many mainstream distributions switched to a 2.6 kernel. Perhaps Palm is doing something similar.

Why not ask Ben why they are using a 2.4.x kernel instead of 2.6.x.

Originally Posted by The_Chupacabra

Palm is now partnering with Wind River to create/suport the Foleo's Linux, so it would appear that the shipping version of the Foleo's Palm Linux will be replaced with a Wind River version of Linux sometime in the next year. Very bizarre strategy on Palm's part, but it suggests they are willing to get much-needed help in developing Linux code.

^^ Indeed. David Beers explaned it fairly well over at Palminfocenter:

As for the whole Wind River thing, this is about kernel and low-level kernel services, tools and developer support. Wind River's "Platform for Consumer Devices" is not an operating system, it's a platform on which a company like Palm can build an operating system with nicely-integrated tools for both system and application developers. I've been saying all along that Palm, like Motorola, ACCESS, and others before them would partner with a commercial Linux vendor to deliver the low-level parts of the system, rather than doing these in-house. Part of the advantage of Linux that there *is* this kind of layered ecosystem now.

The Wind River Workbench is the piece that will most interest application developers, because it's a state-of-the-art Eclipse-based IDE for embedded Linux development--the kind of thing that would be a huge waste of time for Palm to reinvent. The distro and toolchain have been under development at Wind River concurrently with the development of Foleo, so even the 1.0 version wasn't available at the time Palm started this project. I expect that Palm has known for some time that whatever Linux distro they built on at the start would be updated to the latest and greatest commercial Linux distro from a partner like Wind River or MontaVista near release time. If you want to say for dramatic effect that they are "dumping" the old distro they started with you could do that, but I'd be willing to bet that that distro, too, was something they licensed from a vendor back then, not something that Palm developed themselves and are now "dumping" (along with the internal team) in disappointment and disgust.

The ancient kernel that the Foleo is shipping with is likely a reflection on how long the Foleo has been development for and how limited Palm's resources are in terms of its ability to integrate a newer kernel into the shipping version of Palm Linux. [NOTE: In my previous post I had said "As will it ship with the 4 year old Linux distribution shown in the photo." The more correct statement is "As will it ship with the 4 year old Linux kernel shown in the photo."]

It is my understanding that the Wind River partnership is not merely for assistance in production of developer tools but rather to farm out development/maintenance of the Foleo's Linux kernel in addition to provide assistance with the development of the OS components that sit up on top of the kernel. I expect the "Wind Rivered" version of Palm Linux will be quite a different beast than Palm's current in-house version of the Foleo's Palm Linux. With rather limited coding resources, Palm has spent several years hacking a new operating system and doing things that would probably have been more easily accomplished by almost completely outsourcing development to a dedicated Linux development company. It appears that Palm has now seen the writing on the wall and realizes that it does not make sense to try and continually reinvent the wheel.

Given how simplistic the user interface is on the Foleo and how long it appears the device has been in development, it begs the question "Is that all there is?" How much of the OS that will remain in development under the aegis of Palm's own team as opposed to being farmed out to Wind River is something that only Palm can truly answer. Given how slowly Palm's development cycle seems to have progressed over the past three years it would appear that the less development that remains in-house the better off the Foleo will be.

With PalmOS 5 (Garnet) expected to be EOL'ed in 2007, Palm's long-term OS strategy is starting to appear rather shaky:

Foleo Palm Linux - likely to be switched over to a Wind Rivered Palm Linux within months of the Foleo's release. New kernel + new distribution + new development environment = a lot of things that potentially can go wrong. It will be interesting to see how well the Foleo's Linux OS and applications compare with the $300 ASUS Eee PC's Linux OS and applications. At this point in time, I believe that will be one of the two deciding factors re: which of these two devices I purchase as a semi-disposable laptop to play around with. (The other deciding factor in is price - if the Foleo is reduced to $400 I might bite, assuming the OS and applications are competitive with the ASUS Eee PC.)

Treo Palm Linux - Still not yet released and not even expected until 2008. Creating an entirely new Linux-based mobile OS and integrating that with a traditional PalmOS emulator + telephony etc. also seems to be a lot more "new" than Palm's limited coding talent will likely be able to produce in a timely, stable fashion. And for every month that the delivery of a stable Palm Linux Treo slips, the worse Palm's PalmOS 5 devices will look in comparison with more robust competition.

Windows Mobile - While two years ago it appeared that Palm going with Windows Mobile was a shortsighted cash grab, at this point in time Windows Mobile might actually become Palm's safest bet for delivering stable hardware in a timely manner. Some have suggested that Palm may be preparing to dump Windows Mobile once it has released Palm Linux for the Treo platform, but I think that would be a major mistake. It currently takes essentially zero effort for Palm to produce Windows Mobile-based smartphones, since HTC and Microsoft are doing all of the heavy lifting. By 2008 I would not be surprised to see Palm simply rebranding the latest and greatest HTC Windows Mobile devices with a Palm logo and calling it a day.

Unfortunately, at this stage of the game Palm needs to have absolutely nailed the applications/software part of the Foleo package and it appears that this is precisely where the Foleo is rather weak. If you factor in potential problems that may arise from the Foleo's feeble processor along with the device's high price, that leaves the form factor and build quality as the Foleo's main remaining assets. I wonder if a company as small as Palm will be able to leverage those assets as a means of luring potential customers to the Foleo platform and away from traditional competitors that should easily be able to undercut Palm on pricing.

The ancient kernel that the Foleo is shipping with is likely a reflection on how long the Foleo has been development for and how limited Palm's resources are in terms of its ability to integrate a newer kernel into the shipping version of Palm Linux. [NOTE: In my previous post I had said "As will it ship with the 4 year old Linux distribution shown in the photo." The more correct statement is "As will it ship with the 4 year old Linux kernel shown in the photo."]

This is a very incorrect statement. The 2.4.21 kernel is still a mainstream kernel that is deployed by several of the top Linux distributions with support offered through 2009. It is not ancient. Go have a look at the Red Hat and Debian websites for examples.

The photo that you posted a few posts up gives no indication what so ever of the distribution. It only shows the kernel version. For all we know, the Foleo is already running the Wind River distribution of Linux.

Updating the 2.4.21 kernel to a 2.6.x kernel is not that difficult, nor time consuming, of a task. I highly doubt Palm used this version of the Linux kernel because they ran out of time. It is more likely that this kernel did something for them and the Foleo.

Originally Posted by The_Chupacabra

Foleo Palm Linux - likely to be switched over to a Wind Rivered Palm Linux within months of the Foleo's release.

At this point, we donít know what flavor of Linux is running on the Foleo. I highly doubt Palm developed the distribution running on Foleo. This is a fairly major undertaking. It is much more likely that they started with an existing distribution and customized it. There are several very likely, active, distros out there that could have been used as a basis for the foleo.

Originally Posted by The_Chupacabra

Unfortunately, at this stage of the game Palm needs to have absolutely nailed the applications/software part of the Foleo package and it appears that this is precisely where the Foleo is rather weak.

There is no proof that they havenít done this. Just because they hold their cards close to the vest doesnít mean they donít have their act together. I think recent announcements of key software solutions for the Foleo is proof of the contrary.